Re: AOL for Apple II

[Andrew Wells <andyw@tampabay.rr.com>]

I know I'm a bit late on this thread, but thought I'd put in my 2 cents.

As the developer of Online Enhancer, I got a pretty close look at the inside
workings of the AOL software and how commands were sent from the host to the
client (a method no longer used).

As the end drew near, I saw different commands, ones not supported or skipped
by the software.  I had to intercept those commands and skip over them in order
to keep some AOL staff members online.  Luckily, these new commands included a
length byte, so could easily be skipped.

Now, as I understand it, the Geoworks version used a similar, but much more
enhanced command set/protocol than the A2 version did.  The A2 version really
only had about 34 commands.  With this major limitation, and their conversion
from a command based system to an atom stream system pretty much doomed the
A2.  Also, the newer versions support on the fly updates while there was is no
such support in either the A2 or Geoworks versions.

Just a few thoughts and bits of info to chew on..

   Andy.  (LL Andy@aol.com)

     PS:  Hi Larry

Supertimer wrote:

> Ron Hall <crimson@execpc.com> wrote:
>
> >On 24 Jul 1999, Supertimer wrote:
> >
> >> You can still actually log on with a IIGS or a IIe.  The catch is you
> >> need to run the GeoWorks version of AOL via the PC Transporter
> >> IBM XT emulator.
> >
> >Really, whats the point of AOL spending money on developing software for a
> >platform that at best may provide them with a few thousand users?  Between
> >Mac and PC they have like 10 million users don't they? Even if there were
> >10,000 Apple II customers who would sign up, I don't see much advantage in
> >them spending money on developing new software.. If you owned a business,
>
> I agree except for the fact that they let GeoWorks sign on.  Here's
> an idea...if AOL just let the old A2 software sign on just like they
> continue to let GeoWorks sign on, some schools that lack internet
> connections (as in many, many primary and high schools) could
> use their old Apple II units as email terminals via AOL.  That's a
> potential growth area right there.
>
> >and you could get a 1/10th of 1 percent increase in users, but it would
> >cost you a considerable amount of money to do it, would you?  I am not
> >making excuses for AOL, but if I owned it I certainly would not be
> >developing for A2 users.. I may let them still sign on in an extremely
> >limited fashion, but I would not be developing new software.
>
> You wouldn't have the develop new software.  The question is why did
> they continue to let GeoWorks users sign on but not A2 users given
> the fact that both AOL softwares were similarly feature sets?  My
> impression is that they deactivated A2 logons but not GeoWorks ones
> because GeoWorks ran on PCs.  The users were potential customers
> for Windows AOL if they upgraded their PCs and operating systems.
> Just a thought.
>
> I think they could have just left the A2 users alone, though.  No harm
> in letting them sign on.  Many also later owned Macs and PCs, so
> it would have made better business.